The power of politics

The actual and impending changes in political leadership in the UK and the US over the past six months have brought into sharp relief the question of how the personality of politicians has an impact on their leadership and success.

Research from consultancy YSC, which works with organisations to identify talent and the potential of future leaders, shows that people who achieve at a high level in many walks of life share common characteristics that guide talent. Leaders have a distinct quality of drive which is characterised by a motivation, not just to achieve recognition or status, but to leave a lasting impact on their world.

Supporting this drive is an ability to challenge and question and to be courageous in acting with initiative: attributes that could be associated with the term ‘maverick’. Supporting this quality of motivation is a very clear set of intellectual attributes. They have the ability to discern changes in situations allowing them to identify key and emerging issues. They also have the talent to enable them to create frameworks that make sense of these changes for other people, and provide a clear and compelling story. People who are very talented and successful have an ability to understand themselves and their fit with what their environment demands of them.

So, what do we learn about talent and leadership by looking at politicians? Gordon Brown was spotted for his talents when just a child — one of the chosen few fast-tracked and accepted at university, aged only 15. He was identified early on by Neil Kinnock as a rising talent and became shadow spokesman for trade and industry, working with John Smith, and then appointed as shadow chancellor under Smith’s leadership. Hillary Clinton’s situation is quite different to Brown’s. She hasn’t had the protracted experience of moving through electoral politics and sustained conditions in political leadership that would help her hone her innate skills in both influencing and projecting her own persona in a way that builds emotional connection. Her ability, however, to take on feedback does illustrate one of the strengths that can be present in effective female leaders.

Tony Blair is an outstanding example of an individual who was effective in identifying the changes in British society in the early 1990s and using these to reframe a sense of purpose for the Labour Party. This talent led to his success in becoming leader of the Party. Subsequently it provided the basis on which he engendered enormous belief from the British electorate because of the sense that he understood them and what they wanted in terms of change.

But questions could be asked about his basic drive and motivation, which was much more to do with what psychologists call a need for ‘power’ than ‘achievement’. This led to radical, high impact initiatives being pursued — but less success in embedding detailed change.

Gordon Brown, in contrast, shows much more of an orientation towards achievement which is characterised by rigour and the pursuit of challenging objectives. He shows less of an interest in having impact over people. Brown has succeeded within his career within a relatively circumscribed environment where the ability to engender support using interpersonal skills was relatively less critical than the force of his basic drive and intellect.
Hillary Clinton positions herself as a dependable and achievement-oriented candidate. She has given less weight to establishing the connection with people that is critical if she is to have impact over them. She and Brown both share a degree of personal stiffness, and they have both found it hard to frame what they are about in a way that creates a compelling story for people.

A word of caution, though. Research on the psychology of US presidents shows that those who are seen as in tune with the electorate have easier early electoral success but prove over the long haul to be less successful in effecting change.

Ultimately, success, whether it is in running a large business or a country, requires a talented individual who can balance the ability to challenge and be independent while gaining acceptability. Whether this is Brown and Hillary Clinton remains to be seen.